Horsepower

[Ricky1]

Why do I see some guys selling tractors saying they would trade or want one with less hp? I come from the car world where no one ever says that lol help me understand. Also looking for opinions on front loader tractors, is a 4wd that much better as far as control juxtaposed to the 2wd? Thanks

 

[MJMJ]

Not sure on the lesser HP question. But yes, 4 wd or front assist is a huge help when using a loader for certain jobs. A loaded bucket tends to really lift the rear tires up and can severely reduce tration. To the point you can’t accomplish anything. I have a fairly heavy tractor and still have to use 4wd with a loaded bucket or a round bale on the loader.

 

[Ricky1]

Not sure on the lesser HP question. But yes, 4 wd or front assist is a huge help when using a loader for certain jobs. A loaded bucket tends to really lift the rear tires up and can severely reduce tration. To the point you can’t accomplish anything. I have a fairly heavy tractor and still have to use 4wd with a loaded bucket or a round bale on the loader.

Thanks that was my way of thinking.

 

[Brendon-KS]

Why do I see some guys selling tractors saying they would trade or want one with less hp? I come from the car world where no one ever says that lol help me understand. Also looking for opinions on front loader tractors, is a 4wd that much better as far as control juxtaposed to the 2wd? Thanks

A tractor with less power will in general tend to be smaller, lighter, and more maneuverable which for some jobs would be an advantage. On the other hand a car's engine power has nothing to do with its physical size. A tractor's power and size are matched to the jobs it is designed to do and for a given chassis there is an upper limit on how much engine power can be actually utilized. A more powerful car engine is typically chosen simply because it is more fun to drive but the same reasoning doesn't carry over to tractors.

 

[Ricky1]

A tractor with less power will in general tend to be smaller, lighter, and more maneuverable which for some jobs would be an advantage. On the other hand a car's engine power has nothing to do with its physical size. A tractor's power and size are matched to the jobs it is designed to do and for a given chassis there is an upper limit on how much engine power can be actually utilized. A more powerful car engine is typically chosen simply because it is more fun to drive but the same reasoning doesn't carry over to tractors.

I see the concept but more HP is never a bad thing in any case man.

 

[jwal10]

It can be worse, too much horsepower and a light built tractor, and thinking you can make use of the horsepower with a bigger bucket or Implement and break it. A person usually buys a smaller tractor because the use has changed or buying new(er) and go for cheaper but a smaller 4x4 can get a lot more done in the mud and/or with a loader....James

 

[Loosehandle]

Why do I see some guys selling tractors saying they would trade or want one with less hp? I come from the car world where no one ever says that lol help me understand. Also looking for opinions on front loader tractors, is a 4wd that much better as far as control juxtaposed to the 2wd? Thanks

Theres always cost

 

[showcrop]

Why do I see some guys selling tractors saying they would trade or want one with less hp? I come from the car world where no one ever says that lol help me understand. Also looking for opinions on front loader tractors, is a 4wd that much better as far as control juxtaposed to the 2wd? Thanks

Go back and re-read the post that you are referring to.

 

[caterpillar guy]

I don't know of anybody around here that has said they had to much tractor yet and I have not experienced that yet either. Maybe to big to get into some place but not to big other wise.

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

A lot of folks are older, retiring, getting out of the "big farming" but still want a tractor around for property maintenance. A 7-ton, 100HP machine is a little impractical and unwieldy for that kind of work.

 

[Geo-TH,In]

I see the concept but more HP is never a bad thing in any case man.

I love a 20 hp loader backhoe for yard work. Actually I have 2 of these little boys, 20 miles apart.
It only weighs 3100 pounds and doesn't leave ruts in the lawn.
So sometimes bigger isn't always better.
If you know about rear ballast you don't always need 4 wheel drive.
I bought this little guy 16 years age,
One would think I would have broken it by now.
I can lift 1200# using forks attached to the bucket.
I think my L3560 kubota can lift about the same with forks closer to the loader. Kubota has 4 wheel dive.
I'm cautious using the kubota. I'm not sure how easily I could damage the front axle.
I had to use every trick in the book to lift this piece of iron.
Without the 900# rear ballast my front tires went flat and the rear tires almost came off the ground.
The front axle on my little big man is a solid piece of

iron.

 

[Watthour]

Why do I see some guys selling tractors saying they would trade or want one with less hp? I come from the car world where no one ever says that lol help me understand. Also looking for opinions on front loader tractors, is a 4wd that much better as far as control juxtaposed to the 2wd? Thanks

Even in the automotive realm, horsepower is not always king. Consider that the more recent Dodge Challengers advertise over 800HP engines. Consider also that the Caterpillar 3406 can develop a "paltry" 465HP. Which would you want in your OTR truck hauling 40,000 pounds of crushed rock from Kansas City to Colorado Springs? The Dodge would disintegrate somewhere around Salina, and the Cat would be starting to break a little sweat after hauling the load all the way up the hill to its destination.

Application is everything.

 

[timcasbolt]

Sometimes it's the economy of the task at hand. Why pull a 5 foot bush hog with an M when an H is enough and burns less fuel?

 

[paul]

Why do I see some guys selling tractors saying they would trade or want one with less hp? I come from the car world where no one ever says that lol help me understand. Also looking for opinions on front loader tractors, is a 4wd that much better as far as control juxtaposed to the 2wd? Thanks

Big old heavy long framed ag tractors can work well with 2wd. Pile a bunch of weight on the back axle - wheel weights, weight bracket, fluid in the rears. It works fine. Sure, front wheel assist is probably better, but you can get along fine with 2wd if you understand the ballasting.

The newer compact sized and light framed tractors, front wheel assist is most needed. They are too short and too light to get things weighted right for 2wd.

To be clear, 4wd is better in any case, but it is more complicated and more to fix as the machine ages. Older machines the 4wd axle might not turn as short, less maneuverable.

2wd can work fine on the right machine with the right weight setup.

Paul

 

[jwal10]

Until the Oregon winter rains come and the front goes straight down. Many winters we get over 200". The heavier the rig the deeper it goes. The bigger driven front tires stay up a lot better. Once the front wheels go down you will not go anywhere. Many here use a log skidder with a spike on the back to feed round bales. Another reason we have stayed small squares, hay stored in center of barn with covered aprons on both sides and on a hillside so the water runs away....James

 

[Ricky1]

Until the Oregon winter rains come and the front goes straight down. Many winters we get over 200". The heavier the rig the deeper it goes. The bigger driven front tires stay up a lot better. Once the front wheels go down you will not go anywhere. Many here use a log skidder with a spike on the back to feed round bales. Another reason we have stayed small squares, hay stored in center of barn with covered aprons on both sides and on a hillside so the water runs away....James

I live in KY we don’t have that much bad weather. Thankfully

 

[E.B. Haymakin']

Why do I see some guys selling tractors saying they would trade or want one with less hp? I come from the car world where no one ever says that lol help me understand. Also looking for opinions on front loader tractors, is a 4wd that much better as far as control juxtaposed to the 2wd? Thanks

More horsepower will increase fuel consumption. If the engine is naturally aspirated it's gonna be big for that horsepower, if it's not it's turbo'd. I just don't like turbo engines not as forgiving on missing maintenance. Now in discussing what "size" tractor...for me....this is confusing because of the dramatic changes in row crop agriculture that has pushed row crop tractor sizes into the stratosphere for the last 20+ years. I'm stuck in the 1950-1979 tractor mind set that a 50 hp tractor was a utility for mowing, planting, pulling wagons but had a large frame/weight. In that time frame heavy tillage was performed by 80-120hp large frame/heavy tractors. I feel like you want a tractor model that meets that description a 50hp ag utility. My New Holland is 2 wheel drive with 10-16 fronts water weighted rears. Yes in mud and soft footing it can be useless, but if it's that bad I don't need to be in it. If it's 4 wheel drive can u get parts for the front axle? Off the top of my head models in this class...New Holland 3010S, TT50 or TT 60, Ford 4000, or 4600, or 5000 for 70hp, John Deere 2510/2520, 3010 or 3020 for @70hp, John Deere 2555 or equivalents. A 50hp compact is not equal to a 50-70 hp ag utility. If the three point lift is category 2/3 it's in a class of heavier tractors. My 3010S has category 1/2 three point lift eyes, but 50 hp compacts may also. If the manufacturer says it's a compact it's a small tractor, and should be respected as such.

 

[buickanddeere]

Possibly the lower HP recommendation was to stay in a less stringent emissions class ?
The EPA have pretty much left the under 25HP class alone . Although some bunch of fossil hating twits in the EPA . They Want to add the cost and complexity of a full on Tier IV system . The same as used on highway diesel vehicles .
The plan is to force the use of Electric equipment .

 

[Fixingfarmer]

Up to a certain point torque is good. If you don’t have the weight and you loose traction anyway in tractor world it’s worthless to some degree. A good example of this is in my yard. The old 1938 b is sitting there. Rated at 18 hp. Quite modest by anyone’s measure. the Kawasaki in the lawn mower is rated at 26 hp. But if you hook both together the b would drag the little mower all over the place it might be able to tell it’s pulling something if the mower operator is making enough noise…horsepower is not the whole story by any means and has always been a fairly poor measure of how much actual work a tractor will do and why you compare the Nebraska test data with similar sized tractors. How much fuel they use, travel speed and gearing, intended task all were and are factors more than hp.

Nowadays the numbers are bumped to amazingly high levels with cvt transmissions eating power. More power is generally good but largest increase in farm machinery has been its weight. So generally the same customer in 1952 would be interested in a John Deere A as he would in 2015 be interested in a 8270r. The weight would have been around 3500 to 4000 for an A and 32000 for an 8270r hp would have been 34 at the drawbar vs 217. Engine power output increased by 6.4 times. Weight much closer to an increase of tenfold. So all the design and marketing of the highest hp tractor is it worth it when one can just add more deadweight iron? Only if it comes with a refrigerator and a heated and cooled seat. Then we have a winner

 

[Ricky1]

More horsepower will increase fuel consumption. If the engine is naturally aspirated it's gonna be big for that horsepower, if it's not it's turbo'd. I just don't like turbo engines not as forgiving on missing maintenance. Now in discussing what "size" tractor...for me....this is confusing because of the dramatic changes in row crop agriculture that has pushed row crop tractor sizes into the stratosphere for the last 20+ years. I'm stuck in the 1950-1979 tractor mind set that a 50 hp tractor was a utility for mowing, planting, pulling wagons but had a large frame/weight. In that time frame heavy tillage was performed by 80-120hp large frame/heavy tractors. I feel like you want a tractor model that meets that description a 50hp ag utility. My New Holland is 2 wheel drive with 10-16 fronts water weighted rears. Yes in mud and soft footing it can be useless, but if it's that bad I don't need to be in it. If it's 4 wheel drive can u get parts for the front axle? Off the top of my head models in this class...New Holland 3010S, TT50 or TT 60, Ford 4000, or 4600, or 5000 for 70hp, John Deere 2510/2520, 3010 or 3020 for @70hp, John Deere 2555 or equivalents. A 50hp compact is not equal to a 50-70 hp ag utility. If the three point lift is category 2/3 it's in a class of heavier tractors. My 3010S has category 1/2 three point lift eyes, but 50 hp compacts may also. If the manufacturer says it's a compact it's a small tractor, and should be respected as such.

Thanks for the input. I’m looking at some of those models, gonna check the others you listed. I like the International 574, 674 etc and I’ve always been a ford guy so I’m drawn to the fords too!